I’m getting very boring in my old age but I’m taking the approach of not trying to analyse too much until the window is closed. There’s too many moving parts and we need to see where we are once it’s all done. Certainly ripping it up though.
It’s called patience mate which some people seem to lack
I’m getting very boring in my old age but I’m taking the approach of not trying to analyse too much until the window is closed. There’s too many moving parts and we need to see where we are once it’s all done. Certainly ripping it up though.
It’s called patience mate which some people seem to lack
Clearly the plan is to sign 2 players every Friday of the window, hence Ward the keeper being kept back for next Friday as we've already hit our Friday quota.
Seems these owners are having a go although the last few years leave me feeling there’s a twist in the tale. It’s made most of us so cynical when it comes to Charlton.
I still think having Michael Appleton manage potentially one of the strongest squads in the division next season is like asking a corner shop boss to lead Amazon.
A bit mean but I just don’t think he’s a dynamic, winning coach.
Simple answer, the new owners did not have enough time to research new players after taking over and the transfer window closing.
Scott surely knew he was going to be coming back? And it’s not like we aren’t signing well-known names at this level, Scott would have been aware of them all before even getting the job. I don’t think that excuse holds up really
100%
Right before we get into the next calvacade of supposition I am sorry but while am long past vilifying anybody can we please stop this nonsense.
It is not legally possible for Andy Scott to have acted on behalf of the club from early Feb 2023.
1. The previous takeover talks broke down to the point of threatened litigation. 2. Sandgaard terminated Scotts’ contract.
3. Sandgaard was activelypursuing alternative investment. 4. As at Feb 13, Jon Smith was set to be appointed Technical Director
On what basis do you suppose Sandgaard would allow an ex employee to talk to clubs, agents and if allowed players representing an alternative opportunity with the club to the one he was overseeing? As a minimum Sandgaard would have secured a cease & desist order with financial penalties.
How could Scott position himself as representing the club? It would be blatant misrepresentation with specific reputation, fiscal and future career consequences.
Please run me through the dialogue Scott could possibly have had with prospective players, their clubs and their agents? What exactly would be your sales pitch on behalf of a club you are palpably not authorised to represent?
Any suggestion he could have acted on behalf of the new investors still registers as not only gross interference in club affairs but in direct it breach of EFL rules. No party may seek to influence club affairs without having been specifically vetted & approved by the EFL.
Even when headline agreements was reached in June the restrictions would have remained in place. It was not even at this point within the remit of either Sandgaard or Global Partners. After the Jan 2020 debacle for any transfer of ownership agreement to be binding it specifically required EFL sanction. It was not provided until 23 July.
If you know otherwise then I am sure the EFL would pleased to hear about it.
That is the reality.
When 90% of our competitors were able to act without restriction why is any club, agent or player going to hold talks with any unauthorised and unlicensed party. Being palpably unable to put any money on the table positions any contract discussions as meaningless.
Simple answer, the new owners did not have enough time to research new players after taking over and the transfer window closing.
Scott surely knew he was going to be coming back? And it’s not like we aren’t signing well-known names at this level, Scott would have been aware of them all before even getting the job. I don’t think that excuse holds up really
100%
Right before we get into the next calvacade of supposition I am sorry but while am long past vilifying anybody can we please stop this nonsense.
It is not legally possible for Andy Scott to have acted on behalf of the club from early Feb 2023.
1. The previous takeover talks broke down to the point of threatened litigation. 2. Sandgaard terminated Scotts’ contract.
3. Sandgaard was activelypursuing alternative investment. 4. As at Feb 13, Jon Smith was set to be appointed Technical Director
On what basis do you suppose Sandgaard would allow an ex employee to talk to clubs, agents and if allowed players representing an alternative opportunity with the club to the one he was overseeing? As a minimum Sandgaard would have secured a cease & desist order with financial penalties.
How could Scott position himself as representing the club? It would be blatant misrepresentation with specific reputation, fiscal and future career consequences.
Please run me through the dialogue Scott could possibly have had with prospective players, their clubs and their agents? What exactly would be your sales pitch on behalf of a club you are palpably not authorised to represent?
Any suggestion he could have acted on behalf of the new investors still registers as not only gross interference in club affairs but in direct it breach of EFL rules. No party may seek to influence club affairs without having been specifically vetted & approved by the EFL.
Even when headline agreements was reached in June the restrictions would have remained in place. It was not even at this point within the remit of either Sandgaard or Global Partners. After the Jan 2020 debacle for any transfer of ownership agreement to be binding it specifically required EFL sanction. It was not provided until 23 July.
If you know otherwise then I am sure the EFL would pleased to hear about it.
That is the reality.
When 90% of our competitors were able to act without restriction why is any club, agent or player going to hold talks with any unauthorised and unlicensed party. Being palpably unable to put any money on the table positions any contract discussions as meaningless.
Thank you for adding your wisdom to this.. and 100% spot on
I also think, rightly or wrongly, the money men needed to see the issues of our squad for themselves before agreeing to make not-insignificant funds available.
Scott & co. could have absolutely been doing their own research for themselves prior to coming in. And I’m sure that they were.
But I do think they were severely limited in what they could achieve in that shorter time period because of all the circumstances mentioned above.
Now they have their feet under the table, we’re seeing far more aggressive moves being made.
I’ve been told our bid for Collins was rejected but the player is keen on the move. One that might develop over the next 10 days if there is pressure from the player side, ultimately might be one we have to re-visit in the summer if we can’t agree a reasonable figure with Brizzle now.
Was he always a backup option if we failed to get Ladapo? (If so a bit harsh to have him there having his medical the same time as Ladapo). Or were we actually after another striker but something went wrong with him so we are still looking?
Was he always a backup option if we failed to get Ladapo? (If so a bit harsh to have him there having his medical the same time as Ladapo). Or were we actually after another striker but something went wrong with him so we are still looking?
I thought somebody said it was location hence looking for increased personal terms. How reliable that info was I don’t know🤷♂️. A shame because we need another forward and he ticked the hold up player box for me if not the prolific scoring one.
Was he always a backup option if we failed to get Ladapo? (If so a bit harsh to have him there having his medical the same time as Ladapo). Or were we actually after another striker but something went wrong with him so we are still looking?
Apparently we were not 100% happy with his medical ? whether we will investigate more who knows perhaps Aneke being back in the next two weeks may have made us switch to a diff type of striker ??. but bit disappointed because I think we will still a person like him
Was he always a backup option if we failed to get Ladapo? (If so a bit harsh to have him there having his medical the same time as Ladapo). Or were we actually after another striker but something went wrong with him so we are still looking?
I don't know anything but my personal guess is that he was always 3rd or 4th choice and Ladapo becoming available/signing meant that a striker was no longer such a priority.
I suspect we have other options and deals to focus on and we will come back to him later IF those do not work out.
Reams says we’ve put in a 700k bid for Aaron Collins.
If bids of 500k were going in for JCH with 6 months left on his contract, there's no way Bristol Rovers are accepting 700k for a guy with 18 months left. I'd expect they'll want a 1m+.
Reams says we’ve put in a 700k bid for Aaron Collins.
If bids of 500k were going in for JCH with 6 months left on his contract, there's no way Bristol Rovers are accepting 700k for a guy with 18 months left. I'd expect they'll want a 1m+.
Starting bid to test the water .. most likely have to go to 1 mill - 1.2 mill to get him but worth every penny
things are looking more positive for us today than they have for many years - a shame we're so far off the play offs but its been a very good couple of weeks in the transfer market and at long last, things are starting to look up - formation change and good new players and things appear not to be built on sand which was the case in the powell and bowyer booms - christ have we needed this - we're all set for take off !!! COYR!!!
Really hope more than anything MA proves me wrong, but I just can't see it his whole demeanour since he's been with us is like meh like it's just another job to him, I'd never really heard of Holden until he joined but he got everyone onside from the beginning same with Bowyer, and I just haven't seen any of this with Appleton hes got this annoying shrug of the shoulders sort of attitude like he don't care enough, but as I said really hope with all this backing more than Holden had and probably more than Bowyer as well that he turns things round.
things are looking more positive for us today than they have for many years - a shame we're so far off the play offs but its been a very good couple of weeks in the transfer market and at long last, things are starting to look up - formation change and good new players and things appear not to be built on sand which was the case in the powell and bowyer booms - christ have we needed this - we're all set for take off !!! COYR!!!
Shame we didn't get the last two signings in for todays game, but at least Appleton can put a more experienced back line and midfield together for the game, get the other side of the window then see if Appleton can put a team together, there will be no excuses if can't. 3, 5, 2 Doucher ?
Really hope more than anything MA proves me wrong, but I just can't see it his whole demeanour since he's been with us is like meh like it's just another job to him, I'd never really heard of Holden until he joined but he got everyone onside from the beginning same with Bowyer, and I just haven't seen any of this with Appleton hes got this annoying shrug of the shoulders sort of attitude like he don't care enough, but as I said really hope with all this backing more than Holden had and probably more than Bowyer as well that he turns things round.
That’s a fair point about Appleton as I kind of agree but the players speak highly of him and I really like the fact he went to meet Conor Coventry’s parents for a tea to convince him to sign, hopefully now he’s got the players he wants he can prove the doubters wrong 🤞🏻
Really hope more than anything MA proves me wrong, but I just can't see it his whole demeanour since he's been with us is like meh like it's just another job to him, I'd never really heard of Holden until he joined but he got everyone onside from the beginning same with Bowyer, and I just haven't seen any of this with Appleton hes got this annoying shrug of the shoulders sort of attitude like he don't care enough, but as I said really hope with all this backing more than Holden had and probably more than Bowyer as well that he turns things round.
That’s a fair point about Appleton as I kind of agree but the players speak highly of him and I really like the fact he went to meet Conor Coventry’s parents for a tea to convince him to sign, hopefully now he’s got the players he wants he can prove the doubters wrong 🤞🏻
Agreed the owners and SMT have done their part, Apples needs to prove he can get a tune out of what is now a strong league one side, if he can't by summer I'm sure changes will be made to protect their investment.
Comments
May and Delapo.
Neme me a better front two in this shit pit?
Collins has asked to leave Bristol Rovers. We have put a bid in, but a bid to test the water.
Yeah, I popped around to see your wife …
I still think having Michael Appleton manage potentially one of the strongest squads in the division next season is like asking a corner shop boss to lead Amazon.
It is not legally possible for Andy Scott to have acted on behalf of the club from early Feb 2023.
1. The previous takeover talks broke down to the point of threatened litigation.
2. Sandgaard terminated Scotts’ contract.
4. As at Feb 13, Jon Smith was set to be appointed Technical Director
On what basis do you suppose Sandgaard would allow an ex employee to talk to clubs, agents and if allowed players representing an alternative opportunity with the club to the one he was overseeing? As a minimum Sandgaard would have secured a cease & desist order with financial penalties.
How could Scott position himself as representing the club? It would be blatant misrepresentation with specific reputation, fiscal and future career consequences.
Please run me through the dialogue Scott could possibly have had with prospective players, their clubs and their agents? What exactly would be your sales pitch on behalf of a club you are palpably not authorised to represent?
Even when headline agreements was reached in June the restrictions would have remained in place. It was not even at this point within the remit of either Sandgaard or Global Partners. After the Jan 2020 debacle for any transfer of ownership agreement to be binding it specifically required EFL sanction. It was not provided until 23 July.
If you know otherwise then I am sure the EFL would pleased to hear about it.
That is the reality.
When 90% of our competitors were able to act without restriction why is any club, agent or player going to hold talks with any unauthorised and unlicensed party. Being palpably unable to put any money on the table positions any contract discussions as meaningless.
Scott & co. could have absolutely been doing their own research for themselves prior to coming in. And I’m sure that they were.
But I do think they were severely limited in what they could achieve in that shorter time period because of all the circumstances mentioned above.
Now they have their feet under the table, we’re seeing far more aggressive moves being made.
Was he always a backup option if we failed to get Ladapo? (If so a bit harsh to have him there having his medical the same time as Ladapo). Or were we actually after another striker but something went wrong with him so we are still looking?
I suspect we have other options and deals to focus on and we will come back to him later IF those do not work out.
Probably harsh on Uche but that's football sadly.
Agreed the owners and SMT have done their part, Apples needs to prove he can get a tune out of what is now a strong league one side, if he can't by summer I'm sure changes will be made to protect their investment.